To compare the outcomes of contraceptive provision and contraceptive care quality indicators for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing to those who are not was the aim of the study. Researchers did a claims analysis using data from the 2014 Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database. Among premenopausal enrollees aged 15–44, they assessed provision of any contraception as well as provision by contraception type: prescription contraception, long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) devices, and permanent contraception. They contrasted these results based on whether or not the person was deaf or hard of hearing. According to the US Office of Population Health, they assessed contraceptive treatment quality indicators as the proportion of participants who used: 1) LARC methods or 2) highly effective or moderately effective methods. They found 1,171,838 registrants who were at risk of pregnancy, with 13,400 of them being deaf or hard of hearing. Individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing received contraception in 31.4 percent of cases. Individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing were less likely than those who were not deaf or hard of hearing to get prescription contraception. The percentage of people who were deaf or hard of hearing who got the most effective or moderately effective techniques was lower than the number of those who were not. There were no variations in LARC or permanent contraceptive supply based on deaf or hard-of-hearing status.
Individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing were less likely than others to get prescription contraception; the causes behind this pattern must be investigated. These findings should be tracked and compared to data from states with varying contraceptive coverage standards.
